Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-segment lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-segment lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis
Do you wish to request the book?
Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-segment lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion versus minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single-segment lumbar degenerative disease: a meta-analysis
2024
Overview
Background
Minimally invasive spine surgery has seen rapid development in recent years. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of unilateral biportal endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion (ULIF) versus minimally invasive surgery transforaminal interbody fusion (MIS-TLIF) for the treatment of single-segment lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) through a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Methods
In collaboration with various search terms, a comprehensive examination of the scientific literature was carried out using PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang, and other databases. A total of 9 studies were included retrospective cohort studies.
Results
We observed statistically significant differences in intraoperative blood loss, total hospital stay, postoperative hospital stays, and 1-month postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores between the ULIF and MIS-TLIF groups, with the ULIF group being more dominant. MIS-TLIF group was statistically more advantageous in terms of operative time. There were no statistically significant differences in postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, 3-month postoperative and final ODI scores, excellent and good rate, complications, disc heights, and lumbar lordosis angle between the two groups.
Conclusions
Treatment of single-segment LDD with ULIF and MIS-TLIF is both safe and effective. ULIF has the advantage of less intraoperative blood loss, shorter total hospital stay, shorter postoperative hospital stay, and lower ODI scores at 1 month postoperatively compared to MIS-TLIF. There were no significant differences between ULIF and MIS-TLIF in the treatment of LDD in terms of postoperative VAS scores, 3-month postoperative and final ODI scores, satisfaction rates, fusion rates, complications, disc heights, and lumbar lordosis angle. MIS-TLIF has a shorter procedure time than ULIF.
Publisher
BioMed Central,BioMed Central Ltd,Springer Nature B.V,BMC
Subject
Advances in minimally invasive orthopedic surgery
/ Complications and side effects
/ Humans
/ Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - diagnostic imaging
/ Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - surgery
/ Keywords
/ Medicine
/ Minimally invasive surgery transforaminal interbody fusion
/ Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - adverse effects
/ Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - methods
/ Patients
We currently cannot retrieve any items related to this title. Kindly check back at a later time.